DOCSLIB.ORG

Crabs of the Family Homolodromiidae, VI. <I

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Crabs of the Family Homolodromiidae, VI. <I BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE, 68(2): 313–326, 2001 NEW TAXA PAPER CRABS OF THE FAMILY HOMOLODROMIIDAE, VI. HOMOLODROMIA MONSTROSA NEW SPECIES (DECAPODA: BRACHYURA) FROM THE WESTERN NORTH ATLANTIC WITH A REDESCRIPTION OF THE HOLOTYPE OF HOMOLODROMIA PARADOXA A. MILNE EDWARDS, 1880 AND COMMENTS ON SEXUAL DIMORPHISM Joel W. Martin, Jennifer C. Christiansen and Sandra E. Trautwein ABSTRACT A new species of the crab genus Homolodromia A. Milne Edwards, H. monstrosa, is described from four specimens collected in the western Atlantic. The collection consists of two females that differ markedly from descriptions of H. paradoxa (the only other member of the genus known from the western Atlantic) and two males that differ only slightly from H. paradoxa. The holotype of Homolodromia paradoxa A. Milne Edwards, a damaged male from the Leeward Islands, Lesser Antilles, Caribbean, is redescribed. Females of the new species differ from H. paradoxa males (apparently there are no known females of H. paradoxa) in their larger size, in the density and type of setation on the carapace and legs, in having smaller eyes relative to the carapace, and in having relatively stouter appendages. Males of the new species are similar in size and general shape to females, but differ markedly from them most notably by lacking the density and type of setation seen in the females; in this regard they are similar to males of H. paradoxa. Males of the new species differ from males of H. paradoxa mostly in the relative size of the eyes, admittedly a character that could change during ontogeny. The question of sexual dimorphism is raised as concerns these two species vs other members of the genus (nota- bly H. robertsi Garth) and members of the other homolodromiid genus, Dicranodromia A. Milne Edwards, for both of which little or no sexual dimorphism is known. The decapod crustacean genus Homolodromia was erected by A. Milne Edwards in 1880 to accommodate a single male crab collected by the U.S. Coast Survey Steamer BLAKE. This holotype, Homolodromia paradoxa A. Milne Edwards, was collected at a depth of 356 fa (651 m) ‘off Nevis’ in the Leeward Islands (Lesser Antilles) of the Carib- bean. Subsequent to Milne Edwards’s paper there have been few additional reports of H. paradoxa (see Guinot, 1995: 191), and only three additional species in the genus have been described: Homolodromia bouvieri Doflein, 1904, from off the coast of Mozambique; H. robertsi Garth, 1973, from the eastern Pacific; and H. kai Guinot, 1993, from Indone- sia and New Caledonia (see Baez and Martin, 1989; Guinot, 1993, 1995). Additionally, one fossil species, H. chaneyi, has been described from the Eocene La Meseta Formation of Antarctica (Feldmann and Wilson, 1988), and another (H. novazealandica) has been described from New Zealand (Feldmann, 1993). Although there are relatively few subsequent reports of H. paradoxa or any other spe- cies in this family (there is but one other genus, Dicranodromia A. Milne Edwards, in the family) from the North Atlantic or Caribbean, several specimens labeled H. paradoxa exist at the U.S. National Museum of Natural History, suggesting that the species is not as rare as the literature indicates. While surveying the homolodromiid crab holdings of the U.S. National Museum in 1989, one of us (J.M.) encountered a lot containing four very 313 314 BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE, VOL. 68, NO. 2, 2001 large specimens of the genus Homolodromia. At least two of these are so different from the holotype that they can not be attributed to H. paradoxa, previously the only known Atlantic species. These specimens, both females, are the basis of a new species described herein. Additionally, two males collected with the females are described as belonging to the new species, although they differ morphologically from the females. Such marked sexual dimorphism has not been recorded previously for this family. Interpretations of these morphologies are presented. MATERIALS AND METHODS The two female and two male homolodromiid crabs that form the basis of this report were col- lected by the RV OREGON II, sta. 10824, 07°42'N, 053°49'W (approximately 250 km NW of Paramaribo, Surinam, and 500 km ENE of Georgetown [Demerara], Guyana), western Atlantic Ocean, at a depth of 345 fa (631 m) on 27 November 1969. These were originally labeled H. paradoxa. In addition, two other male specimens were examined. One of these (USNM 310892, MV OREGON, sta. 3635, 16°58'N, 087˚53'W, approximately 20 mi due E of Stann Creek, Belize, western North Atlantic Ocean, depth 250–400 fa, 457–732 m) was labeled H. paradoxa, and the other (USNM 310891, RV OREGON II, sta. 10831, 17˚38'N, 063˚48'W, W of Saba Island, western North Atlantic Ocean, depth 356 fa, (651 m) was not labeled. The holotype male (MCZ 6512) of H. paradoxa A. Milne Edwards was borrowed from the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts. SYSTEMATICS Family Homolodromiidae Alcock, 1900 Genus Homolodromia A. Milne Edwards, 1880 Homolodromia paradoxa A. Milne Edwards, 1880 (Figs. 1–3) Synonymy.—See Guinot, 1995: 191. Not Homolodromia paradoxa Takeda and Okutani, 1983: 112, photographs (= H. monstrosa new species, described herein). Material Examined.—Holotype, MCZ 6512, male, carapace length 15.7 mm (exclud- ing rostral horns), 356 fa (651 m), ‘off Nevis’, Leeward Islands, Lesser Antilles, Carib- bean. Description.—Male holotype carapace length 15.7 mm; other selected measurements given in Table 1. Carapace (Figs. 1,2).—Inflated, more or less cylindrical in cross section. Surface smooth to minutely granulate. Scattered simple setae especially on the anterior and anterolateral regions, becoming smooth posteriorly. Rostral horns large, well developed, slightly longer and broader than anterolateral teeth. Small sharp tooth located between anterolateral tooth and rostral horn, above eyestalk in dorsal view (Fig. 2C). Minute spines and tubercles visible at higher magnification on carapace, anterolateral teeth, and rostral horns (e.g., Fig. 2B). Carapace roughly divisible into thirds by weak transverse grooves; posterior third the widest and most inflated region. Third Maxilliped (Fig. 3A).—Well developed, pediform, heavily covered with small spines (especially on outer margins) and simple setae. MARTIN ET AL.: NEW HOMOLODROMIA FROM WESTERN ATLANTIC 315 Figure 1. Homolodromia paradoxa A. Milne Edwards, 1880, male holotype (MCZ 6512), carapace, eyes, and antennae (see also Fig. 2A). Note sparse covering of simple setae, and relatively large and well pigmented eye. Chelipeds (Fig. 3B–D).—Long, slender, sparsely covered with simple setae and occa- sional granules. Dactylus falls between tips of bifurcated propodus. Length of propodus (including fixed finger) approximately 4.2 times greatest height (measured at midlength). Fixed finger deflected downward at point where it joins palm. Carpus bearing strong, sharp laterally-directed spine near distal border, most obvious in dorsal view (Fig. 3D). Pereiopods 2 and 3 (Fig. 3E).—Elongate, with sparse covering of small spines and simple setae. Dactylus gently curved, with curve more pronounced in distal half, and with numerous short, sharp spines and short setae. Pereiopods 4 and 5 (Fig. 3F,G).—Both subchelate, with dactylus closing against and into a circlet of spines on propodal ‘thumb’. P4 and P5 oriented in opposite directions (rotated during development), with dactylus directed posteriorly in P4 but anteriorly in P5 (Figs. 3F,G). Pereiopod 4 with 5 or 6 spines on propodal thumb and with propodus 316 BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE, VOL. 68, NO. 2, 2001 Figure 2. Homolodromia paradoxa A. Milne Edwards, 1880, male holotype (MCZ 6512). Selected aspects of the carapace, eyes, and antennae. a, carapace, dorsal view; b, left side of frontal region, including anterior third of carapace, eye, and antennae; c, dorsal view of right rostral horn, anterolateral tooth, eye, and base of antenna; d, frontal view of left orbit, both antenna removed (hatched areas); e, ventral view of rostral horns, bases of antennules, and left antenna and eye. shorter relative to width than in pereiopod 5 (compare Figs. 3F,G). Merus of pereiopod 4 with large, acute dorsodistal tooth. Pereiopod 5 with at least 8 sharp, sclerotized spines on propodal thumb opposing dactylus and another 2 or 3 at base of dactylus. Dactylus strongly curved, sclerotized in distal half, and with smaller spines along ‘cutting’ edge. Male Pleopods (Fig. 3I,J).—First pleopod stout, bearing simple setae along entire length and tufts of longer setae distally, with narrow groove on anterior face to accommodate MARTIN ET AL.: NEW HOMOLODROMIA FROM WESTERN ATLANTIC 317 Figure 3. Homolodromia paradoxa A. Milne Edwards, 1880, male holotype (MCZ 6512). Selected appendages. a, third left maxilliped, outer view; b, right cheliped, frontal view of dactylus (with broken tip), propodus, and distal border of carpus with carpal spine directed outward; c, distal half of right chela, inner view; d, carpus of right chela, dorsal view; e, left pereiopod 2, anterior (functionally ventral) side, tip of dactylus broken; f, right pereiopod 4, posterior (dorsal) surface, with dactylus and propodal ‘thumb’ enlarged at right; g, right pereiopod 5, posterior (dorsal) surface, with dactylus and propodal ‘thumb’ enlarged at right; h, telson; i, distal two segments of first pleopod; j, second pleopod. 318 BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE, VOL. 68, NO. 2, 2001 Table 1. Comparison of measurements of selected features of the holotypes of Homolodromia paradoxa (male) and H. monstrosa (female) (USNM 310889) and the photographed male H. monstrosa (USNM 310890) (Fig. 6). All measurements are in mm. Ha. paradoxa H. monstros MeCZ 6512 Hdolotyp Photographe feemale mal Carapace length* 155.7 365. 38. Carapace width** 142.4 352. 33. R1ostral horns 22. 27. 3. (distance between tips) A7L teeth of carapace 161. 223. 28. (distance between tips) Right Cheliped: L7ength of dactylus 5. *** 182.2 14. L7ength of propodus 171.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Classification of Living and Fossil Genera of Decapod Crustaceans
    RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2009 Supplement No. 21: 1–109 Date of Publication: 15 Sep.2009 © National University of Singapore A CLASSIFICATION OF LIVING AND FOSSIL GENERA OF DECAPOD CRUSTACEANS Sammy De Grave1, N. Dean Pentcheff 2, Shane T. Ahyong3, Tin-Yam Chan4, Keith A. Crandall5, Peter C. Dworschak6, Darryl L. Felder7, Rodney M. Feldmann8, Charles H. J. M. Fransen9, Laura Y. D. Goulding1, Rafael Lemaitre10, Martyn E. Y. Low11, Joel W. Martin2, Peter K. L. Ng11, Carrie E. Schweitzer12, S. H. Tan11, Dale Tshudy13, Regina Wetzer2 1Oxford University Museum of Natural History, Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3PW, United Kingdom [email protected] [email protected] 2Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, 900 Exposition Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90007 United States of America [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] 3Marine Biodiversity and Biosecurity, NIWA, Private Bag 14901, Kilbirnie Wellington, New Zealand [email protected] 4Institute of Marine Biology, National Taiwan Ocean University, Keelung 20224, Taiwan, Republic of China [email protected] 5Department of Biology and Monte L. Bean Life Science Museum, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602 United States of America [email protected] 6Dritte Zoologische Abteilung, Naturhistorisches Museum, Wien, Austria [email protected] 7Department of Biology, University of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA 70504 United States of America [email protected] 8Department of Geology, Kent State University, Kent, OH 44242 United States of America [email protected] 9Nationaal Natuurhistorisch Museum, P. O. Box 9517, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands [email protected] 10Invertebrate Zoology, Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History, 10th and Constitution Avenue, Washington, DC 20560 United States of America [email protected] 11Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, Science Drive 4, Singapore 117543 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] 12Department of Geology, Kent State University Stark Campus, 6000 Frank Ave.
    [Show full text]
  • Part I. an Annotated Checklist of Extant Brachyuran Crabs of the World
    THE RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2008 17: 1–286 Date of Publication: 31 Jan.2008 © National University of Singapore SYSTEMA BRACHYURORUM: PART I. AN ANNOTATED CHECKLIST OF EXTANT BRACHYURAN CRABS OF THE WORLD Peter K. L. Ng Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research, Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, Kent Ridge, Singapore 119260, Republic of Singapore Email: [email protected] Danièle Guinot Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, Département Milieux et peuplements aquatiques, 61 rue Buffon, 75005 Paris, France Email: [email protected] Peter J. F. Davie Queensland Museum, PO Box 3300, South Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT. – An annotated checklist of the extant brachyuran crabs of the world is presented for the first time. Over 10,500 names are treated including 6,793 valid species and subspecies (with 1,907 primary synonyms), 1,271 genera and subgenera (with 393 primary synonyms), 93 families and 38 superfamilies. Nomenclatural and taxonomic problems are reviewed in detail, and many resolved. Detailed notes and references are provided where necessary. The constitution of a large number of families and superfamilies is discussed in detail, with the positions of some taxa rearranged in an attempt to form a stable base for future taxonomic studies. This is the first time the nomenclature of any large group of decapod crustaceans has been examined in such detail. KEY WORDS. – Annotated checklist, crabs of the world, Brachyura, systematics, nomenclature. CONTENTS Preamble .................................................................................. 3 Family Cymonomidae .......................................... 32 Caveats and acknowledgements ............................................... 5 Family Phyllotymolinidae .................................... 32 Introduction .............................................................................. 6 Superfamily DROMIOIDEA ..................................... 33 The higher classification of the Brachyura ........................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Crustaceans in Cold Seep Ecosystems: Fossil Record, Geographic Distribution, Taxonomic Composition, 2 and Biology 3 4 Adiël A
    1 Crustaceans in cold seep ecosystems: fossil record, geographic distribution, taxonomic composition, 2 and biology 3 4 Adiël A. Klompmaker1, Torrey Nyborg2, Jamie Brezina3 & Yusuke Ando4 5 6 1Department of Integrative Biology & Museum of Paleontology, University of California, Berkeley, 1005 7 Valley Life Sciences Building #3140, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA. Email: [email protected] 8 9 2Department of Earth and Biological Sciences, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA 92354, USA. 10 Email: [email protected] 11 12 3South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, Rapid City, SD 57701, USA. Email: 13 [email protected] 14 15 4Mizunami Fossil Museum, 1-47, Yamanouchi, Akeyo-cho, Mizunami, Gifu, 509-6132, Japan. 16 Email: [email protected] 17 18 This preprint has been submitted for publication in the Topics in Geobiology volume “Ancient Methane 19 Seeps and Cognate Communities”. Specimen figures are excluded in this preprint because permissions 20 were only received for the peer-reviewed publication. 21 22 Introduction 23 24 Crustaceans are abundant inhabitants of today’s cold seep environments (Chevaldonné and Olu 1996; 25 Martin and Haney 2005; Karanovic and Brandão 2015), and could play an important role in structuring 26 seep ecosystems. Cold seeps fluids provide an additional source of energy for various sulfide- and 27 hydrocarbon-harvesting bacteria, often in symbiosis with invertebrates, attracting a variety of other 28 organisms including crustaceans (e.g., Levin 2005; Vanreusel et al. 2009; Vrijenhoek 2013). The 29 percentage of crustaceans of all macrofaunal specimens is highly variable locally in modern seeps, from 30 0–>50% (Dando et al. 1991; Levin et al.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Become a Crab: Phenotypic Constraints on a Recurring Body Plan
    Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 25 December 2020 doi:10.20944/preprints202012.0664.v1 How to become a crab: Phenotypic constraints on a recurring body plan Joanna M. Wolfe1*, Javier Luque1,2,3, Heather D. Bracken-Grissom4 1 Museum of Comparative Zoology and Department of Organismic & Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, 26 Oxford St, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA 2 Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Balboa–Ancon, 0843–03092, Panama, Panama 3 Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520-8109, USA 4 Institute of Environment and Department of Biological Sciences, Florida International University, Biscayne Bay Campus, 3000 NE 151 Street, North Miami, FL 33181, USA * E-mail: [email protected] Summary: A fundamental question in biology is whether phenotypes can be predicted by ecological or genomic rules. For over 140 years, convergent evolution of the crab-like body plan (with a wide and flattened shape, and a bent abdomen) at least five times in decapod crustaceans has been known as ‘carcinization’. The repeated loss of this body plan has been identified as ‘decarcinization’. We offer phylogenetic strategies to include poorly known groups, and direct evidence from fossils, that will resolve the pattern of crab evolution and the degree of phenotypic variation within crabs. Proposed ecological advantages of the crab body are summarized into a hypothesis of phenotypic integration suggesting correlated evolution of the carapace shape and abdomen. Our premise provides fertile ground for future studies of the genomic and developmental basis, and the predictability, of the crab-like body form. Keywords: Crustacea, Anomura, Brachyura, Carcinization, Phylogeny, Convergent evolution, Morphological integration 1 © 2020 by the author(s).
    [Show full text]
  • New Records of 31 Species of Brachyuran Crabs from the Joint Taiwan-France Expeditions, “Taiwan 2000” and “Taiwan 2001”, Off Deep Waters in Taiwan
    NEW RECORDS OF 31 SPECIES OF BRACHYURAN CRABS FROM THE JOINT TAIWAN-FRANCE EXPEDITIONS, “TAIWAN 2000” AND “TAIWAN 2001”, OFF DEEP WATERS IN TAIWAN BY PING-HO HO1), PETER K. L. NG2), TIN-YAM CHAN3,5) and DING-AN LEE4) 1) National Museum of Marine Biology and Aquarium, 2 Houwan Road, Checheng, Pingtung, Taiwan 944, R.O.C. 2) Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, Kent Ridge, Singapore 119260, Republic of Singapore 3) Institute of Marine Biology, National Taiwan Ocean University, 2 Pei-Ning Road, Keelung, Taiwan 202, R.O.C. 4) Taiwan Fisheries Research Institute, Council of Agriculture, 199 Ho-Ih Road, Keelung 202, Taiwan, R.O.C. ABSTRACT In recent collections from deep waters around Taiwan, numerous new records of brachyuran crabs were obtained for Taiwan. Thirty-one species are added to the known Taiwanese brachyuran fauna, including 13 new records of genera and two new records of families (Homolodromiidae and Cymonomidae). The established brachyuran crab fauna for Taiwan now stands at 604 species. RÉSUMÉ Au cours de collectes récentes dans les eaux profondes autour de Taiwan, de nombreux signale- ments nouveaux de crabes Brachyoures ont été obtenus. Trente et une espèces sont ainsi ajoutées à la faune connue des Brachyoures de Taiwan, incluant 13 nouvelles citations de genres et deux nouvelles citations de familles (Homolodromiidae et Cymonomidae). La faune des Brachyoures de Taiwan s’élève maintenant à 604 espèces. INTRODUCTION In their synopsis of the brachyuran crab fauna of the main island of Taiwan, Ng et al. (2001) listed 548 species from the island. Since then, another 25 species have been added (Galil, 2001; Hsueh & Huang, 2002; Huang et al., 2002; Jeng & Ng, 2002; Ng & Huang, 2002; Ng et al., 2002, 2003; Jeng et al., 2003; Ng & Ho, 2003a, b; Ng & Liu, 2003; Ng & McLay, 2003; Schubart et al., 2003, also together 5) Corresponding author; e-mail: [email protected] © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2004 Crustaceana 77 (6): 641-668 Also available online: www.brill.nl 642 PING-HO HO ET AL.
    [Show full text]
  • Systema Brachyurorum: Part I
    THE RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2008 17: 1–286 Date of Publication: 31 Jan.2008 © National University of Singapore SYSTEMA BRACHYURORUM: PART I. AN ANNOTATED CHECKLIST OF EXTANT BRACHYURAN CRABS OF THE WORLD Peter K. L. Ng Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research, Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, Kent Ridge, Singapore 119260, Republic of Singapore Email: [email protected] Danièle Guinot Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, Département Milieux et peuplements aquatiques, 61 rue Buffon, 75005 Paris, France Email: [email protected] Peter J. F. Davie Queensland Museum, PO Box 3300, South Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT. – An annotated checklist of the extant brachyuran crabs of the world is presented for the first time. Over 10,500 names are treated including 6,793 valid species and subspecies (with 1,907 primary synonyms), 1,271 genera and subgenera (with 393 primary synonyms), 93 families and 38 superfamilies. Nomenclatural and taxonomic problems are reviewed in detail, and many resolved. Detailed notes and references are provided where necessary. The constitution of a large number of families and superfamilies is discussed in detail, with the positions of some taxa rearranged in an attempt to form a stable base for future taxonomic studies. This is the first time the nomenclature of any large group of decapod crustaceans has been examined in such detail. KEY WORDS. – Annotated checklist, crabs of the world, Brachyura, systematics, nomenclature. CONTENTS Preamble .................................................................................. 3 Family Cymonomidae .......................................... 32 Caveats and acknowledgements ............................................... 5 Family Phyllotymolinidae .................................... 32 Introduction .............................................................................. 6 Superfamily DROMIOIDEA ..................................... 33 The higher classification of the Brachyura ........................
    [Show full text]
  • Crustacea: Decapoda: Brachyura) from the Pacific Northwest of North America and a Reassessment of Their Fossil Records
    J. Paleont., 78(1), 2004, pp. 133–149 Copyright ᭧ 2004, The Paleontological Society 0022-3360/04/0078-133$03.00 HOMOLIDAE DE HAAN, 1839 AND HOMOLODROMIIDAE ALCOCK, 1900 (CRUSTACEA: DECAPODA: BRACHYURA) FROM THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST OF NORTH AMERICA AND A REASSESSMENT OF THEIR FOSSIL RECORDS CARRIE E. SCHWEITZER,1 TORREY G. NYBORG,2 R. M. FELDMANN,3 AND RICHARD L. M. ROSS4 1Department of Geology, Kent State University Stark Campus, 6000 Frank Ave. NW, Canton, Ohio 44720, Ͻ[email protected]Ͼ, 2Department of Natural Sciences, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, California 92350, Ͻ[email protected]Ͼ, 3Department of Geology, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio 44242, Ͻ[email protected]Ͼ, and 41835 Brant Place, Courtenay, British Columbia V9N 8Y8 Canada, Ͻ[email protected]Ͼ ABSTRACT—New material collected from Cretaceous and Tertiary rocks of the Pacific Northwest of North America has prompted a reevaluation of the fossil record of the Homolidae de Haan, 1839 and the Homolodromiidae Alcock, 1900. The fossil records of the homolid genera Homola Leach, 1815; Homolopsis Bell, 1863; and Hoplitocarcinus Beurlen, 1928 are restricted, and Latheticocarcinus Bishop, 1988, which is synonymous with Eohomola Collins and Rasmussen, 1992 and Metahomola Collins and Rasmussen, 1992, is reinstated as a distinctive genus. Thirteen new combinations resulted from reinstatement of Latheticocarcinus: L. adelphinus (Collins and Rasmussen, 1992), L. affinis (Jakobsen and Collins, 1997), L. atlanticus (Roberts, 1962), L. brevis (Collins, Kanie, and Karasawa, 1992), L brightoni (Wright and Collins, 1972), L. centurialis (Bishop, 1992), L. declinata (Collins, Fraaye, and Jagt, 1995), L. dispar (Roberts, 1962), L. pikeae (Bishop and Brannen, 1992), L. punctatus (Rathbun, 1917), L.
    [Show full text]
  • Crustacea Library Smithsonian Institute
    CRUSTACEA LIBRARY SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTE RETURN TO W-119 DEEPWATER BRACHYURA (CRUSTACEA : DECAPODA) FROM SOUTHERN QUEENSLAND, AUSTRALIA WITH DESCRIPTIONS OF FOUR NEW SPECIES P.J.F. DAVIE AND J.W. SHORT Davie, P.J.F. and Short, J.W. 1989 11 13: Deepwater Brachyura (Crustacea : Decapoda) from southern Queensland, Australia with descriptions of four new species. Mem. Qd Mus. 27(2): 157-187. Brisbane. ISSN 0079-8835. Twenty-eight species of deepwater crabs are recorded from mid-and southeastern Queensland taking the number now known to 33. Nine species have not previously been recorded from Australia, viz Dicranodromia baffini Alcock and Anderson, Latreillopsis bispinosa Henderson, Paromola japonica Parisi, Paromoiopsis boasi Wood-Mason, Notopoides latus Henderson, Cyrtomaia horrida Rathbun, Pleistacantha oryx Ortmann, Benthochascon hemingi Alcock and Anderson, Intesiuspilosus Guinot and Richer de Forges. Four new species are described. Ranilia tenuiocellus sp. nov. resembles R. horikoshi Takeda in having degenerated eyes but differs in the lack of orbital teeth. Ranilia trirufomaculata sp. nov. is described from Western Australia and Queensland. It is distinguished from R. misakiensis Sakai by the three dorsal red spots, the sharp distal spine on the superior border of the palm, the lack of a raised ridge on the wrist, and carapace proportions. A key to Indo-west Pacific Ranilia H. Milne Edwards species is given. Mursia microspina sp. nov. differs from its closest congener M. hawaiiensis Rathbun by having shorter postero-lateral borders, a smaller length to breadth ratio, and by the shape of the tubercles on the lower inferior border of the chela. Rochinia griffini sp. nov. is unique in the disposition and length of the carapace spines.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogeny of the Brachyura (Crustacea, Decapoda): Evidence from Spermatozoal Ultrastructure
    Phylogeny. of the Brachyura (Crustacea, Decapoda): Evidence from Spermatozoal Ultrastructure Barrte G. M. JAMIESON *, Danièle GUINOT ** & Bertrand RI~HERDE FORGES *** * Zoology Department, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Q 4072, Australia I: ** Laboratoire de Zoologie (Arthropodes) Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, 61 rue Buffon, F-75231 Paris cedex 05, France *** ORSTOM, B. P. A5, Nouméa Cedex, Nouvelle-CalBdonie ABSTRACT Spermatozoa of Dynomene aff. devaneyi (Dynomenidae) and Homolodromia kai (Homolodromiidae) are described. I Parsimony analyses affirm the classification of the Brachyura by GUINOT(1978), notably the groupings Podotreinata and Heterotremata sensu luto, as Sister-groups, and Thoracotremata are confirmed. In the Podotremata, association of the Raninoidea and Cyclodorippoidea is upheld (as sister-groups), each with convincing and unique synapomorphies, but sperm data considered alone do not supporc alliance of the Homolidae, (a very clearly defined group) with this couplet and therefore cio not endoIse the grouping Archaeobrachyura which is, however, upheld by combined spermatozoal and non- spermatozoal data. The Dromiacea sensu Guinot (Dromiidae, Dynomenidae and Homolodromiidae) is confirmed spermatologically as a monophyletic grouping but the discreteness of the three constituent families is not upheld. Homolodromia displays a mixture of dromiid and dynomenid spermatozoal features. The Dynomenidae and Dromiidae are each found to be paraphyletic. Latreillia sp., considered an homoloid by GUINOT(1978) and GUINOT& RICHERDE FORGES (1993, forms a polytomy either with Homolidae+Raninoidea-Cyclodorippoidea with the combined, spermatozoal and non-spenna:ozoaI, data set or with Homolidae+Dromiidae-Dynomenidae-Homolodromiidae,for sperm data only. The association by G~oT(1978) of the Dorippoidea, Portunoidea, Xanthoidea, and Majoidea in the non-thoracotreme Heterotremata is fully supported spermatologically.
    [Show full text]
  • Southeastern Regional Taxonomic Center South Carolina Department of Natural Resources
    Southeastern Regional Taxonomic Center South Carolina Department of Natural Resources http://www.dnr.sc.gov/marine/sertc/ Southeastern Regional Taxonomic Center Invertebrate Literature Library (updated 9 May 2012, 4056 entries) (1958-1959). Proceedings of the salt marsh conference held at the Marine Institute of the University of Georgia, Apollo Island, Georgia March 25-28, 1958. Salt Marsh Conference, The Marine Institute, University of Georgia, Sapelo Island, Georgia, Marine Institute of the University of Georgia. (1975). Phylum Arthropoda: Crustacea, Amphipoda: Caprellidea. Light's Manual: Intertidal Invertebrates of the Central California Coast. R. I. Smith and J. T. Carlton, University of California Press. (1975). Phylum Arthropoda: Crustacea, Amphipoda: Gammaridea. Light's Manual: Intertidal Invertebrates of the Central California Coast. R. I. Smith and J. T. Carlton, University of California Press. (1981). Stomatopods. FAO species identification sheets for fishery purposes. Eastern Central Atlantic; fishing areas 34,47 (in part).Canada Funds-in Trust. Ottawa, Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, by arrangement with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, vols. 1-7. W. Fischer, G. Bianchi and W. B. Scott. (1984). Taxonomic guide to the polychaetes of the northern Gulf of Mexico. Volume II. Final report to the Minerals Management Service. J. M. Uebelacker and P. G. Johnson. Mobile, AL, Barry A. Vittor & Associates, Inc. (1984). Taxonomic guide to the polychaetes of the northern Gulf of Mexico. Volume III. Final report to the Minerals Management Service. J. M. Uebelacker and P. G. Johnson. Mobile, AL, Barry A. Vittor & Associates, Inc. (1984). Taxonomic guide to the polychaetes of the northern Gulf of Mexico.
    [Show full text]
  • Decapoda (Crustacea) of the Gulf of Mexico, with Comments on the Amphionidacea
    •59 Decapoda (Crustacea) of the Gulf of Mexico, with Comments on the Amphionidacea Darryl L. Felder, Fernando Álvarez, Joseph W. Goy, and Rafael Lemaitre The decapod crustaceans are primarily marine in terms of abundance and diversity, although they include a variety of well- known freshwater and even some semiterrestrial forms. Some species move between marine and freshwater environments, and large populations thrive in oligohaline estuaries of the Gulf of Mexico (GMx). Yet the group also ranges in abundance onto continental shelves, slopes, and even the deepest basin floors in this and other ocean envi- ronments. Especially diverse are the decapod crustacean assemblages of tropical shallow waters, including those of seagrass beds, shell or rubble substrates, and hard sub- strates such as coral reefs. They may live burrowed within varied substrates, wander over the surfaces, or live in some Decapoda. After Faxon 1895. special association with diverse bottom features and host biota. Yet others specialize in exploiting the water column ment in the closely related order Euphausiacea, treated in a itself. Commonly known as the shrimps, hermit crabs, separate chapter of this volume, in which the overall body mole crabs, porcelain crabs, squat lobsters, mud shrimps, plan is otherwise also very shrimplike and all 8 pairs of lobsters, crayfish, and true crabs, this group encompasses thoracic legs are pretty much alike in general shape. It also a number of familiar large or commercially important differs from a peculiar arrangement in the monospecific species, though these are markedly outnumbered by small order Amphionidacea, in which an expanded, semimem- cryptic forms. branous carapace extends to totally enclose the compara- The name “deca- poda” (= 10 legs) originates from the tively small thoracic legs, but one of several features sepa- usually conspicuously differentiated posteriormost 5 pairs rating this group from decapods (Williamson 1973).
    [Show full text]
  • An Illustrated Marine Decapod Crustacea] of Florida
    QcfU fja^ Technical Series Volume 8 Number 1 Parti State of Florida November 1986 Department of Environmental Regulation An Illustrated Marine Decapod Crustacea] of Florida Lawrence G. Abele and Won Kim o*' Illustrated by Elizabeth Woodsmall <MP- Technical Series Volume 8 Number 1 State of Florida Part a November 1986 Department of Environmental Regulation An Illustrated Guide to tl Marine Decapod Crustacea] of Florida Lawrence G. Abele and Won Kim Illustrated by Elizabeth Woodsmall An Illustrated Guide to the Marine Decapod Crustaceans of Florida Part 1 Lawrence G. Abele and Won Kim Florida State University Department of Biological Science Tallahassee, Florida 32306 Illustrated by Elizabeth Woods ma 11 Copyright © 1986 The Florida State University. All rights reserved. An Illustrated Guide to the Marine Decapod Crustaceans of Florida Part 2 Lawrence G. Abele and Won Kim Florida State University Department of Biological Science Tallahassee, Florida 32306 Illustrated by Elizabeth Woodsmall Copyright © 1986 The Florida State University. All rights reserved. List of Species i Contents List of Species ii Introduction 1 Brief Review of the Literature 1 Methods and Materials. 2 Classification and Arrangement of Taxa 2 Acknowledgments. 3 Diagrammatic Illustration of a Shrimp 4 Diagrammatic Illustration of a Crab 5 Annotated Checklist of the Decapod Crustaceans of Florida 7 Addendum to Checklist 69 Key to Families of Florida Decapods 70 Keys to Species of Florida Decapods 79 Literature Cited 731 Taxonomic Index 748 il List of Species List of Species [See also Addendum to Checklist] Suborder Dendrobranchiata Family Aristeidae 1. Aristaeomorphafoliacea (Risso, 1827). 7, 79, 81 2. Plesiopenaeus edwardsianus (Johnson, 1867).
    [Show full text]